IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ZIYAD RAHMAN A.A.

TH TUESDAY, THE 15 DAY OF JULY 2025 / 24TH ASHADHA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 23138 OF 2025 PETITIONER/S:

ASHIK K.T. , AGED 26 YEARS S/O AZEEZ K.T., AGED 26 YEARS, RESIDING AT KOORATTUTHODI (H), KONDOORKKARA P.O., KALLADIPATTA VIA, ONGALLUR – II, PATTAMBI, PIN - 679313 BY ADVS.

SHRI.K.H.ASIF SHRI.C.A.MAJEED SMT.MOLTY MAJEED SHRI.P.B.UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR SMT.SHERIN BIJU RESPONDENT/S:

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

2 INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, INTELLIGENCE UNIT-1, STATE GST DEPARTMENT, PALAKKAD, KERALA, PIN - 678001

3 DEPUTY/ASSISTANT ENFORCEMENT OFFICER, ENFORCEMENT SQUAD, PATTAMBI, STATE GST DEPARTMENT, PALAKKAD, KERALA, PIN -

678001 OTHER PRESENT:

SHRI.K.H.ASIF, SHRI.ARUN AJAY SANKAR, G.P THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.07.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the registered owner of a vehicle bearing registration No.TN-99-X - 8854. The petitioner is aggrieved by Exts.P5 and P6 orders of confiscation of the goods which the petitioner was transporting, and the vehicle as well.

2. The facts that led to the filing of this writ petition are as follows: The petitioner used the vehicle, for the transportation of certain goods from M/s Ahalia Metal Mart to M/s Metro Fresh Trading Company on 23.07.2024, and during transit, the vehicle was intercepted and detained by the 3^rd respondent alleging evasion of tax by using fake invoices. In the said vehicle, the petitioner was also transporting 3,600 kg of Brass scrap from M/s. Majestic Metals to M/s Unique Metal Mart, covered under an E-way bill. Alleging that the said transactions are covered by the bills which are fake, the proceedings were initiated. The notice of the said proceedings was issued to the petitioner through the petitioner's driver and ultimately Exts.P5 and P6, the goods and the conveyance were ordered to be confiscated. As per Ext.P5, the petitioner was permitted to pay a fine in lieu of confiscation in respect of the conveyance; Rs.98,145/- towards CGST and Rs.98,145/- towards SGST. Similarly, in Ext.P6, the penalty in lieu of confiscation was ordered in respect of the conveyance for an amount of Rs.1,54,529/- towards CGST and Rs.1,54,529/- towards SGST. Even though the goods were released on payment of the fine fixed in the respective orders, the vehicle is even now remains in the custody of the respondents. Exts.P5 and P6 orders were passed as early as on 22.08.2024, but the petitioner neither challenged the said orders nor paid the penalty, and instead, the petitioner has submitted this writ petition challenging the aforesaid orders.

3. I have heard, Sri.Asif K.H., the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Arun Ajay Shankar, the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner has raised various contentions with regard to the sustainability of the allegations raised against the petitioner. According to him, even as per the notices issued, there is nothing to indicate that the petitioner was involved in the transactions consciously and according to him he was only transporting the goods which were covered as per the invoices. It was pointed out that the allegation that the articles were procured by the consignee, based on fake invoices, which as such, does not indicate the role of the petitioner. However, this is a question which has to be decided based on the records and being a question of fact this Court cannot go into those aspects in a proceeding under Article

226 of the Constitution of India.

5. It is discernible from the impugned orders that, the petitioner was served with a notice and, even though a reply was submitted, he never attended for any personal hearing before the officer concerned. Moreover, despite the fact that, the impugned orders were passed as early as on 22.08.2024, th